Leslie’s new contract

When faculty at the Alamo Colleges delivered an overwhelming vote of no confidence to Chancellor Bruce Leslie last week, it made trustees sit up and listen to the swelling drumbeat of unrest among professors.

But it was too late to inform their decision on Leslie’s employment contract.

By the time faculty votes were counted, trustees had already extended the chancellor’s contract until 2012.

In the new contract, trustees did not give Leslie a raise, just as they did not give district employees a raise this year.

However, the contract includes a $15,000 annual retention bonus with no performance criteria attached.

This year, Leslie recieved a $30,000 retention bonus that was included in his original contract, which rewarded him for sticking around for the past three years.

In addition to the bonuses, Leslie recieves $12,000 a year for a car allowance and a membership to the Plaza Club.

If you add up the perks and retention bonuses, Leslie made around $355,000 this year (including the 30K retention bonus), and will make $340,000 next year if he earns the $15K rentention bonus.

Melissa Ludwig

19 Responses

I’m sorry Melissa, but you and Joe need to work harder on understanding universities, community colleges, and educational institutions in general. This is especially important since you have the position of representing the city, county, and perhaps even the state and nation’s educational situation.

Why don’t you ASK or RESEARCH BY ASKING the presidents of these UNIVERSITIES why their positions “seem to be” more prestigious? In fact, maybe you should ask them if they think that Leslie’s position should be considered just as prestigious as theirs. Then go to the Texas legislators and ask them. You’d learn very quickly how weak this evidence that you want to apply truly is.

The information I provided earlier about universitities being more prestigious has to do with doctoral degrees and money that the institutions get from the state and federal governments for these programs. They, fairly or not, bring in LOTS more money (and in return, LOTS MORE prestige) than community colleges.

There is nothing wrong with working at the community college or being a community college faculty member. In fact, in many ways, the job is more challenging. However, even Alamo College District demonstrates the difference in prestige through the money they pay their adjuncts and tenure/tenure track faculty members.

Look at ALL OF the evidence; then make logical decisions that are supported from the evidence. Try NOT to be bias (like holding closed door meetings with only one side of a particular group).

After reading the comments, I feel I should add some context to my post on Leslie’s salary. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education’s salary survey, the following community college chancellors made the most money in 2007-2008:

Richard Carpenter, Lone Star College: $361,398

Leonardo de la Garza, Tarrant County College: $350,500

Wright Lassiter, Dallas County Community College: $329,853

The data is a bit old, but it should give you an idea of what Leslie’s peers make.

Also, in response to the comment about university presidents making more money than community college chancellors because they preside over more pretigious institutions with doctoral programs, i would point out that the Alamo Colleges is, in fact, a larger operation than UTSA. The colleges serve nearly 100,000 students in workforce and academic programs, while UTSA serves 29,000. The colleges manage far more employees and facilities. Alamo’s budget is around $275 million a year, while UTSA is around $365 million (because of those expensive grad programs and higher salaries).

And the reason presidents of health science centers make so much money is because they are typically doctors, many of them specialists who could earn more than half a million per year in their line of work. To make an administrative position attractive, it has to pay. A lot.

I don’t want to discourage you Joe, but you really are over your head here. You can’t compare Leslie to Romo or Cigarroa because they are presidents of four year institutions that also host doctoral programs. If you did just a little more homework, you would know that these types of schools bring in lots more money from the state and hold much higher rankings fiscally speaking than anything Leslie has been given responsibility for. Thank goodness! Leslie would get laughed right out of the room by these people, and rightfully so.

I realize you have had your feelings hurt by some of those on this forum, and maybe you think Leslie is a knight in shining armor because you “have not heard anything with this tone from him.” That’s because when he spoke in that tone he was speaking to the faculty, not you–and you wonder why the faculty are so angry.

OK, Let me get this straight, someone named Panda Girl is telling me that I “seriously need to grow up” and to keep my comments to myself? Brilliant! I love your approach to public discourse and dialog. No wonder you are having a problem communicating with higher ups in the system.

Dr. Ricardo Romo made $378,600 last year as President of UTSA. Dr. Francisco Cigarroa made $842,792 as President of UT Health Science Center. Everything should be in perspective including wages and compensation. It’s obvious you are picking on Dr. Leslie because you do not agree with his ideas for unifying the colleges. I disagree with you. I think the system is stronger as a whole not divided. Try to compare this to the whole individual states vs. a strong central national government debate that took place in the last century.

As far as you voting plans, you can only vote in one district and nottwo. Since your statement indicates you obviously do not understand this concept, I doubt you even know which district you live in. Pretty weak arguments. So far, I’m just hearing alot of name calling and exaggerations. I don’t know much about Bruce Leslie but I have not heard anything with this tone from him, Panda Girl.

Joe, you seriously need to grow up. Unless you take the time to actually pay attention to everything that happens in the district, please keep your comments to yourself. Leslie is going a great job, huh? Well, I think the deficit the district is in means he isn’t doing a great job. I think the fact that he hires people for Vice Chancellor positions without job descriptions means he isn’t doing a good job. I think the fact that everyone is being forced to cut budgets and he’s over there with a car allowance and a country club membership is ridiculous! The professors have every right to complain about Leslie. They are having to deal with a corrupt bureaucracy and overloaded classes. They are receiving budget cuts by the MILLIONS! The Board of trustees NEVER should have hired Leslie in the first place. Seriously, why would you hire someone that had already had two votes of no confidence from the other districts they worked at? It is RIDICULOUS. If salaries were meant to be competitive, our faculty would be getting paid more. The Chancellor is one of the highest paid in our state. I think the Board needs to open their eyes and realize the danger they are putting the schools in, as well as their very own Board seats. I know I’m not voting to keep McClendon or Rindfuss on this Board…and I’m telling everyone that I can. We need new people on the Board…people that actually care about the community and the students.

He has not really done a great job. The little peons have been doing the brunt of the work. They are the ones who make the school a success. Not only the faculty, but the staff that handles admissions and financial aid. They have been very understaffed and when people leave their jobs the position gets eliminated by the chancellor putting more strain on the employees who stay. Then those employees have a hard time providing quality service to the students. The chancellor can’t hire a needed employee with a salary of $23k a year, but they can go ahead and create positions for upwards of almost double. I agree that if there is a so called financial crisis, that he not accept the bonus. His response (and paraphrased) was: “Nobody is giving up their bonuses so why should I?” If the staff in these “hard economic times” have the work their butts off towards no rewards, then why should he get all of these perks as their “leader?”

It’s unfortunate things like this happen even in a school system where you would think the education would come first. You would think the teachers and professors should have more say in these decisions. SAC, though a community college, is most assuredly one of the better, if not one of the best community colleges in the nation, and when the majority of teachers and professors (SAC’s lifeblood) get disgruntled, CLEARLY, there’s a problem. So instead of fixing the issue, they’ve just prolonged it (seems to be the trend in our nation currently). Now as a student I will get to see the early retirement and or transfers of these great educators, and get stuck with a new group of teachers who lack the experience necessary. I’ve read some other comments here of people tired of hearing the faculty and staff “complaining”. So to those of you, if you were facing budget cuts and or loss of employment because of politics, you’re telling me you would just sit there and accept it?… That’s what I thought

The bottom line here is that these old gizzers are not treating LesLIE like a king for nothing, there is some kind of payoff in the end. Denver McClendon is in the Real Estate business and LesLIE sure is pushing Playland Park on the taxpayers of Bexar County, what is Denver’s commission or finders fee and how much is LesLIE going to make off this deal? These good ‘ol boys aren’t scratching each others ass for the fun of it.

The problem is: competetive or not. Mr. Leslie has been at two other colleges, both of which resulted in “no-confidence”. He is now in San Antonio and has gotten a THIRD “no confidence” tag. Second, how does he warrant more money when the faculty has not even received a salary bump. Mr. Leslie has NOT BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB…

What seems clear is there is something foul going on with these Trustees…If they had a ounce of self-respect, they would be mortified at their own behavior..Shame on them…

While I cannot condone all of the behavior of all professors -you should know that the argument is larger than how it has been framed by Ludwig. This is not “whiney professors” who don’t want their budget cut vs. the district making the “tough decisions” about budget. If you do enough research you’ll find the whole budget “crisis” is not really a crisis at all – the district has money in the bank!

I recommend for Melissa Ludwig to read the SAC resolutions – there are many factors involved here than simple budget cuts. Professors are not against budget cuts per se – they are against leadership that has continually lied to their faces in regards to many decisions including curriculum – where the district has clearly over stepped their bounds. Bruce and the board have a “top down” approach and are not interested in listening to faculty or staff.

The bonus is another example that the board has a complete disconnect from the public and their stakeholders. Bruce personally also exhibited a lack of leadership by accepting this bonus – in a time of a “budget crisis” – it’s a disgrace.

I understand your point and appreciate your comment Jim. I may be naive, but I don’t think voting for a trustee is the only real question. I am questioning the integrity of a group of change averse teachers with a personal agenda running a smear campaign against a decent man.

They may win in the end but at what cost? Any sympathy I had for the vocal minority has been eroded by the childish and manipulative behavior I am witnessing everyday at school.

Change can be good if it makes it easier for me to register, get financial aid, transfer classes, or even if it just saves the tax payers money. The gripes I keep hearing just aren’t grounded in the reality of today’s economic environment.

If teachers are going to set the example, they need to act like grownups and work for improving the system and not just attack a perceived threat to their status quo. I’m so over this!

Hey, Joe. The real question is….of all the people whining, I wonder how many vote for Trustees when the time comes?? Or, how many vote period. I believe in the saying that, “If you don’t vote, keep your mouth shut!

I really don’t understand all of the negative comments. He is earning a competitive salary for his job. My macroeconomics teacher at SAC says the labor market sets the wage level for a job in our economy. Leslie, Sculley, Puente, and Lee are all earning what their counterparts in other markets earn.

By most accounts, Leslie seems to be doing a great job. I’m really tired of hearing my professors whining about this and that instead of paying attention to helping me learn. I miss high school where the teachers behaved professionally!

The Board should be ashamed of themselves extending Leslie’s contract. He has caused nothing but pure choas at ACC not to mention the raises in tuition and low wages of Faculty. At least we know where our increase in tuition goes- bonuses and The Plaza Club. He has definitely not fixed the parking problem or the increase of tuition and textbooks. REMEMBER THE BOARD WHEN IT COMES TIME TO VOTE THEY ALL NEED TO GO!!!!!

Couldn’t these community colleges better use this money? His salary seems excessive, esp. for what you’re getting. I’m sure they could all use better/updated books for the library or office equipment. The Plaza Club? Seriously? Wow.

The trustees have done a great disservice to ACC faculty and the students of ACC. It is beyond my understanding how Leslie can take such a salary and “perks” knowing that he has a large group of instructors working as adjuncts whose pay is beneath the poverty level. And this is but one example of the problems ACC is facing. The trustees better be prepared for the clean up when Leslie “finishes” with ACC and moves on to his next victim. Ask Houston.